The WORD of GOD is a precious gift, a love letter from our Creator. EVERYTHING that we need to know is in there. Why? Because God wanted us to take comfort in KNOWING. Knowing that He is in Control, in KNOWING that he sees all and Knows all, in Knowing that he has our back, in KNOWING that we can TRUST HIM.
The WORD is full of promises for those who LOVE HIM. More importantly, it tells us the END from the BEGINNING. This is amazing. We have seen it played out throughout history. EVERYTHING that GOD said would be has been proven to be true. How wonderful it is to KNOW that we can rest in HIM.
We don’t have to worry about provision, protection, deliverance, peace, joy, love, wisdom, knowledge, understanding. If there is anything that troubles us or that we don’t understand, all we have to do is ASK. Because the WORD OF GOD IS ALIVE!! He is still speaking to us today.
Those who do not KNOW our Heavenly Father can’t possibly understand. They think we are fools. I will tell you, I don’t understand how they can face a day without HIM. I know I couldn’t, no would I want too! To KNOW the Creator of the Everything is the greatest treasure anyone could ever find.
So many people are being cheated out of the comfort and joy that people of the Bible know. By design the Magicians/Scientists have been working hard to steal FAITH. They have been “debunking” the Bible and changing laws, time, and seasons. IT is all deception. Just because they can get people to believe it, does not make it true. There is only ONE TRUTH.
In fact, the word believe is a perversion of the word used in the Bible. Take a look at the definition of believe and more importantly the root of that word. Remember, the root is all that matters. Everything else is a perversion/lie/coverup.
| believe (v.)
Old English belyfan “to have faith or confidence” (in a person), earlier geleafa (Mercian), gelefa (Northumbrian), gelyfan (West Saxon), from Proto-Germanic *ga-laubjan “to believe,” perhaps literally “hold dear (or valuable, or satisfactory), to love” (source also of Old Saxon gilobian “believe,” Dutch geloven, Old High German gilouben, German glauben), ultimately a compound based on PIE root *leubh- “to care, desire, love” (see belief).
So, you see that the devil’s hand is clearly present in the word believe. The root of the word is Proto-Indo European. You see in Sanskrit it means to be filled with desire, to make crazy. In Persian it means TANGLED!! hit down, to be “in love”. To believe in Satan’s realm is to trust in the lust of your heart.
Let’s take a look at the word as it was originally written in the Word of GOD.
Much clearer in God’s word that it is a positive, character building, comforting, strengthening, lawful and upright trust!
THAT is what the Devil is working to destroy. What better place to start than at the very beginning. IF he can convince you that you cannot trust GOD’s word, if you cannot trust that HE is in control, that HE created all things, that HE created everything about the environment in which we live, for US!! To nourish, protect and provide for ALL of our needs, than we are defeated.
SO, today, we are going to look at what God’s word has to say about all that, and what SCIENCE has to say.cer
Apr 6, 2019
This next video is extrememly long. It is a compilation of several parts of a series. It took me all day to watch it, but it was well worth the time investment. Though I do not agree with everything as presented the video is very enlightening. It contains so many photos and videos and provides so much information and teaching that will blow your mind. It clearly demonstrates how technology is not new. How they have known about electromagnetism and free energy for a very, very, very long time. It shows you how past societies harnessed that energy and enjoyed amazing technology, far beyond what we know today.
LINK : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuV7s0h4ZzM9LzsQ1Hho0cg
The Myth of Heliocentrism by Pr. Charlie Kennon
Historians, Astronomers, Mathematicians, Philosophers, and the New Age Scientism…
Is it really a proven scientific fact that the earth rotates on its axis at 1,000 mph. as it races through space at a speed of 66,000 mph. in orbit around the sun? Or is the earth, according to Scripture and verified scientific evidence actually at the center of the universe, stationary, and orbited by the sun, planets and star field? The glorious Biblical and scientifically validated truth set forth herein is sure to challenge the mythical heliocentric status quo and possibly your worldview as well. The tragic repercussion of rejecting the totality of the Scriptures as the perfect and authoritative standard of all reality, knowledge, ethics and beauty is that man will of necessity be relegated to grope in darkness as he vainly seeks to acquire certain knowledge independent of the Creator. Moreover, the Bible declares that all those who reject the self-attesting authority of God’s word will be given over to some degree of deception. This absolute spiritual truth is manifest in our day by the fact that “folly is set in great dignity” (Eccl 10:6). Case in point: What could be more laughable than evolution? What could be more barbaric than abortion? What could be more perverted than sodomy? What could be more demonic than Islam? What could be more arbitrary than psychology? Yet these antichrist ideologies are celebrated and promoted in our land and thought to be “normal” and even scientific.
“But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets.” Acts 24:14
A Brief Historical Sketch
An important question we should ask is this, “Why did Copernicus come to the conclusion that the sun is the center of the universe?” The answer to this question is to be found, not in the realm of science, but rather in the realm of religion and philosophy. Copernicus was particularly interested in the pagan Greek philosophers, Pythagoras and Aristarchus. Both of these men considered that the sun, being the embodiment of everything good and noble in the universe, should be the center of all of life. Copernicus agreed with his ancient Greek counterparts, and thus devised a heliocentric cosmological model in which the sun was the center of the universeand the stars and planets, including the earth, revolved around it. Although Copernicus’ theory provided explanations for odd phenomena like retrograde motion, it really did not prove that the planets actually orbited the sun.
Ideas Have Consequences
What saith the Scripture?
“To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” Isaiah 8:20
“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” Genesis 1:1-2
“Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.” Joshua 10:12-13
“Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down. “ Isaiah 38:8
“as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.” Psalm 19:5-6
“They fought from heaven; the stars in their courses fought against Sisera.” Judges 5:20
“And they answered the angel of the LORD that stood among the myrtle trees, and said, We have walked to and fro through the earth, and, behold, all the earth sitteth still, and is at rest.” Zechariah 1:11“Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.” 1 Chronicles 16:30 “Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.” Job 9:6“Therefore will not we fear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea.” Psalm 46:2 “The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.” Psalm 93:1“Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously.” Psalm 96:10
“Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.” Psalm 104:5
“Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.” Psalm 119:90 “
One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.” Ecclesiastes 1:4
“Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.” Isaiah 13:13
“Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.” 1 Corinthians 8:13
“But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. Malachi 4:2
What saith Science?
Scientific Experiments Proving Geocentricity
Is Heliocentricity Really Scientific?
“There are only two possibilities as to how life arose. One is spontaneous generation arising to evolution; the other is a supernatural creative act of God.There is no third possibility. Spontaneous generation, that life arose from non-living matter was scientifically disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others.That leaves us with the only possible conclusion that life arose as a supernatural creative act of God. I will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in God. Therefore, I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible.”
“Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural.We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.” Richard Lewontin
What do you believe regarding this subject my friend? And more importantly, why do you believe it? Is the word of God your epistemological foundation, or have you exalted your reason above God’s testimony and perhaps given credence to another myth of scientism inspired by the spirit of the age which is hostile to God and His word? CK.
Science has been hijacked since day one, the moment Adam and Eve partook of the Forbidden Fruit.
That was the goal of the Serpent… to take control of it…
2 Corinthians 4:4
“In whom the god of this worldhath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them”
He (Satan) is now “God of this World”and guides Mankind into creating all kinds of ‘Devices’ in order that we attempt to fulfil his ultimate goal of becoming God.
We are almost there.
Transhumanism’s tender leaves are finally beginning to shoot forth after thousands of years of the Serpent’s subtle influences… (This is nothing new. It has happened before. The same scenario has repeated itself multiple times throughout history.)
“Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh”
Interests:The Word of GOD! Microbiology/Biochemistry /Physics/Genetics Young Earth Creationist
Has Science been hijacked?
Well yes and no.
What has happened is people from the Pseudo-Sciences: astronomy, astrophysics, cosmology, paleontology, geology, anthropology, archaeology, evolutionary biology (lol), theoretical physics…
Have performed a Clumsily Juvenile “Bait and Switch” Equivocation Fallacy with the term “Science” and ACTUAL Sciences — (Those that follow The Scientific Method: Quantum Mechanics/Biochemistry/Genetics) — and call themselves “SCIENCES” by mere FIAT when they’re NOT. Ironically, just like God warned us…
(1 Timothy 6:20) “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:”
Since the Fairytale Pseudo-Science Masqueraders know that the Joe Coffee and Betty Breadmaker Masses wouldn’t know what ACTUAL “Science” was if it landed on their heads, spun around, and whistled dixie… they’re afforded the courtesy to walk around pontificating and PRETENDING TO BE SOMETHING THEY’RE NOT !!! (after their father Satan/the Devil who is the GREAT PRETENDER/The Father of Lies/The JOKER.)
For a very good article on the Joker/Trickster click the article title below:
TRICKED BY THE LIGHT: TRICKSTERS & THE TRICKSTER GOD
What Is Science?
by Roger Patterson on February 22, 2007; last featured July 29, 2014
Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic.
—Dr. Scott Todd, Kansas State University, Nature 401(6752):423, Sept. 30, 1999
Many people do not realize that science was actually developed in Christian Europe by men who assumed that God created an orderly universe. If the universe is a product of random chance or a group of gods that interfere in the universe, there is really no reason to expect order in nature. Many of the founders of the principle scientific fields, such as Bacon, Galileo, Kepler, and Newton, were believers in a recently created earth. The idea that science cannot accept a creationist perspective is a denial of scientific history.
To help us understand that science has practical limits, it is useful to divide science into two different areas: operational science and historical (origins) science. Operational science deals with testing and verifying ideas in the present and leads to the production of useful products like computers, cars, and satellites. Historical (origins) science involves interpreting evidence from the past and includes the models of evolution and special creation. Recognizing that everyone has presuppositions that shape the way they interpret the evidence is an important step in realizing that historical science is not equal to operational science. Because no one was there to witness the past (except God), we must interpret it based on a set of starting assumptions. Creationists and evolutionists have the same evidence; they just interpret it within a different framework. Evolution denies the role of God in the universe, and creation accepts His eyewitness account—the Bible—as the foundation for arriving at a correct understanding of the universe.
What Your Textbook Says
|It is not necessary to distinguish between historical and operational science.||11–23, 1060– 1061||19, 299||3–14||14– 20||1:1, 1:2, 3:1|
|Observability, testability, repeatability, and falsifiability are the hallmarks of the scientific method.||11–23||27, 37–38, 305||10, 14, 369, T537||19||1:1, 1:2, 1:3|
|There are some questions science cannot answer.||21–22||38||5–6||—||1:1, 1:3|
|Questions about behavior can be answered by asking “why” questions.||—||51, 54||T870||824||1:1, 1:3|
|Evolution was not observed, but we can still understand how it happened.||396–397||51, 54||410||—||1:2, 1:3, 3:4|
|Biblical creation is religion, and evolution is science.||—||—||3||277||1:1, 1:2, 1:3|
Note: Page numbers preceded by “T” indicate items from the teacher notes found in the margins of the Teacher’s Edition.
What We Really Know
If an idea is not testable, repeatable, observable, and falsifiable, it is not considered scientific.
In its original form science simply meant “knowledge.” When someone says today that they work in the field of science, a different picture often comes to mind. Science, in the view of an outspoken part of the scientific community, is the systematic method of gaining knowledge about the universe by allowing only naturalistic or materialistic explanations and causes. The quote on page 19 reflects this attitude. Science in this sense automatically rules out God and the possibility that He created the universe because supernatural claims, it is asserted, cannot be tested and repeated. If an idea is not testable, repeatable, observable, and falsifiable, it is not considered scientific. The denial of supernatural events limits the depth of understanding that science can have and the types of questions science can ask. We may define naturalism and materialism as:
Naturalism: a belief denying that an event or object has a supernatural significance; specifically, the doctrine that scientific laws are adequate to account for all phenomena.
Materialism: a beliefclaiming that physical matter is the only or fundamental reality and that all organisms, processes, and phenomena can be explained as manifestations or interactions of matter.
The problem with the above definition of science is that, even though naturalistic science claims to be neutral and unbiased, it starts with a bias.The quote from Dr. Todd on page 19 demonstrates that bias: only matter and energy exist and all explanations and causes must be directly related to the laws that matter and energy follow. Even if the amazingly intricate structure of flagella in bacteria appears so complex that it must have a designer, naturalistic science cannot accept that idea because this idea falls outside the realm of naturalism/materialism. Many scientists have claimed that allowing supernatural explanations into our understanding of the universe would cause us to stop looking for answers and just declare, “God wanted to do it that way.” This is, of course, false.
The ability to study the world around us is only reasonable because there is a Lawgiver who established the laws of nature. Most people do not realize that modern science was founded by men who believed that nature can be studied because it follows the laws given to it by the Lawgiver. Johannes Kepler, one of the founders of astronomy, said that science was “thinking God’s thoughts after Him.” Many founders of scientific disciplines, such as Bacon, Newton, Kepler, Galileo, Pascal, Boyle, Dalton, Linnaeus, Mendel, Maxwell, and Kelvin were Bible-believing Christians. As a matter of fact, the most discerning historians and philosophers of science have recognized that the very existence of modern science had its origins in a culture at least nominally committed to a biblical worldview. (See www.answersingenesis.org/go/bios.)
Science has been hijacked by those with a materialistic worldview and exalted as the ultimate means of obtaining knowledge about the world.
What, then, should Christians think of science? Science has been hijacked by those with a materialistic worldview and exalted as the ultimate means of obtaining knowledge about the world. Proverbs tells us that the fear of God, not science, is the beginning of knowledge. In a biblical worldview, scientific observations are interpreted in light of the truth that is found in the Bible. If conclusions contradict the truth revealed in Scripture, the conclusions are rejected. The same thing happens in naturalistic science. Any conclusion that does not have a naturalistic explanation is rejected.
The words creation and evolution can be used in many different ways. Evolution will be used in this book to describe the naturalistic process that is alleged to have turned molecules into man over billions of years. As creation is used through out this book, it is intended to describe the supernatural acts of God who created the universe and everything in it in six, approximately 24-hour days, about 6,000 years ago.This perspective is often referred to as young-earth creationism. The true history of the universe is revealed to us from God’s eyewitness perspective in the Bible. This history can be summarized as the 7 C’s of history: Creation of the universe, Corruption of the universe as a result of man’s sin, the judgment of mankind in the Catastrophe of Noah’s Flood, Confusion of languages at Babel, Christ coming to earth to live a righteous life and then to pay for our sins on the Cross, and the future Consummation when God creates the New Heaven and New Earth. This history serves as a foundation for interpreting evidence in the biblical creationist’s worldview.
Making a distinction between two types of scientific study helps us to understand the limitations of naturalistic presuppositions in science:
Operational (Observational) Science: a systematic approach to understanding that uses observable, testable, repeatable, and falsifiable experimentation to understand how nature commonly behaves.
… Biblical creationists believe that God has created a universe that uses a set of natural laws that operate consistently in the universe. Understanding how those laws operate is the basis for scientific thinking.
Some events defy natural laws. Christians refer to these things as miracles, but naturalistic science must find a way to explain these occurrences naturally. This approach rejects miracles in the Bible because they cannot be explained using natural laws. Such scientists occasionally try to explain the miracles in the Bible as natural phenomena, but this ultimately undermines the authority of God and His Word.
What Is Historical (Origins) Science: interpreting evidence from past events based on a presupposed philosophical point of view.
The past is not directly observable, testable, repeatable, or falsifiable; so interpretations of past events present greater challenges than interpretations involving operational science. Neither creation nor evolution is directly observable, testable, repeatable, or falsifiable. Each is based on certain philosophical assumptions about how the earth began. Naturalistic evolution assumes that there was no God, and biblical creation assumes that there
was (is) a God who created everything in the universe. Starting from two opposite presuppositions and looking at the same evidence, the explanations of the history of the universe are very different. The argument is not over the evidence—the evidence is the same—it is over the way the evidence should be interpreted.
Evolutionists often claim that people misuse the word “theory” when discussing science and don’t make a distinction between a scientific theory and the common use of the word “theory.” You may say, “I have a theory about why Mr. Jones’ hair looks funny” but that theory has never been compared to a broad set of observations. This is not the sense of a theory in science.
In light of this, few would argue that there are different types of theories. So it would be good to refine this term further to avoid any baiting and switching of the word “theory”. Just as it was valuable to distinguish between operational and historical science, it would be good to do the same with operational and historical theories. A scientific operational theory is:
Operational Theory: an explanation of a set of facts based on a broad set of repeatable and testable observations that is generally accepted within a group of scientists.
That evolution has been elevated to the status of an operational theory (and “fact” in the opinion of some) is not due to the strength of the evidence, but in spite of it. Because evolutionary ideas are interpretations of past events, they are not as well-founded as testable scientific theories like Einstein’s Theory of Relativity or Newton’s Theory of Gravity. (BOTH OF WHICH HAVE BEEN PROVEN TO BE IN ERROR) These theories offer predictable models and the ability to conduct experiments to determine their validity in different circumstances. Molecules-to-man evolution does not offer this opportunity because these events happened in the past. Therefore, evolution is not an operational theory. For these reasons evolution could be considered an historical theory, along with creation models and other origins theories.
Historical Theory: an explanation of past events based on the interpretation of evidence that is available in the present.
Evolution also relies heavily on the assumption of uniformitarianism— a belief that the present is the key to the past. According to uniformitarians, the processes in the universe have been occurring at a relatively constant rate. One of these processes is the rate of rock formation and erosion. If rocks form or erode at a certain rate in the present, uniformitarians believe that they must have always formed or eroded at nearly the same rate. This assumption is accepted even though there are no observations of the rate of erosion from the distant pastand there is no way to empirically test the erosion rate of the past. However, the Bible makes it very clear that some events of the past were radically different from those we commonly observe today.Noah’s Flood, for example, would have devastated the face of the earth and created a landscape of billions of dead things buried in layers of rock, which is exactly what we see.
Just as evolutionists weren’t there to see evolution happen over several billion years, neither were creationists there to see the events of the six days of creation. The difference is that creationists have the Creator’s eyewitness account of the events of creation, while evolutionists must create a story to explain origins without the supernatural. Just because many scientists believe the story does not make the story true. (The Bible is not TRUE because we beleive it. We believe it because it is TRUE. We KNOW the GOD who wrote it. We have first hand EXPERIENCE with HIM. We have experiential EVIDENCE that He is Faithful and TRUE.) Believing the Bible and the information that has been revealed to us by our Creator gives us a foundation for thinking—including our thinking about science. Good operational science can provide us with answers to many questions about the world around us and how it operates, but it cannot answer the questions of where we came from and why we are here. Those questions are outside the scope of operational science. But we are not left without an answer. God has given us the answers to those questions in His Word, the Bible.
1:1 The nature of science and of theories on origins, Gish, www.icr.org/article/391
Scientific theories must be testable and capable of being proven false. Neither evolution nor biblical creation qualifies as a scientific theory in this sense, because each deals with historical events that cannot be repeated. Both evolution and creation are based on unobserved assumptions about past events. It is inconsistent to say that evolution qualifies as a scientific theory while creation does not. Both have scientific character by attempting to correlate scientific data within a certain framework (model).
No theory of origins can avoid using philosophical statements as a foundation. Creationists use a supernatural act by an Intelligent Designer to explain the origin of the universe and the life we see on earth. Evolutionists do not allow any supernatural explanation as a foundation but insist that only natural laws and processes can be used as explanations. Both are worldviews used to interpret the data. The data is the same; the interpretations arrive at different conclusions based on the starting assumptions. Allowing only evolutionary teaching in public schools promotes an atheistic worldview, just as much as teaching only creation would promote a theistic worldview. Students are indoctrinated to believe they are meaningless products of evolution and that no God exists to whom they are accountable.
Life on earth was either created or it developed in some progressive manner; there are no other alternatives. While there are many versions of both creation and evolution, both cannot be true.
Accepting that God created the universe in the way that He said He did is a common stumbling block for many who want to accept the interpretation promoted by evolutionary scientists. There are many reasons why the God of the Bible would not have used evolution and the big bang to create the universe. Those who hold to this position are putting man’s fallible interpretation of scientific data into the text of Genesis.
Accepting the big bang or evolution as factual accounts of the origin of life and the universe is not scientific.They are interpretations of facts. The assumptions that underlie the interpretations are based on the idea that man can determine truth independent of God. Operational science is based on repeatable observations and falsifiable statements while historical science is based on interpreting data that cannot be repeated. Operational science leads to computers and space shuttles as products of repeatable processes. Historical science leads to shifting interpretations that are not reliable.
The only way to arrive at a true interpretation is to start with true assumptions. Since the Bible is the eyewitness account of the Creator of the universe, it is the best starting point for interpreting past events.
1:3 Creation: Where’s the proof? Ham, www.answersingenesis.org/go/proof
…Facts exist in the present, and our interpretations are an attempt to connect the past to the present. The evolutionists must assume everything about the past, while biblical creationists have the Bible as a “time machine” that can provide valuable insight into the past.
If science depends on naturalistic explanations, it must accept that our thoughts are simply the products of chemical reactions that evolved from random chance. How can you ultimately rely on randomness to evolve the correct way of thinking? If there is no God, ultimately, philosophically, how can one talk about reality? How can one even rationally believe that there is such a thing as truth, let alone decide what it is? (This is why to unbelievers there is not ultimate TRUTH. Truth for them is self determined. “your truth”, “my truth”, “truth is relative” these are all things that people in our Postmodern Pagan society say. They will tell you that you can’t force “your” truth on them.)
Questions to Consider
- Do all scientists believe in naturalistic evolution? Why or why not?
- There are two contenders for the history of life on earth: some form of naturalism (evolution) or supernatural creation. Are there really any alternatives to some form of naturalistic evolution in science if science is restricted to naturalism?
- Since evolution and creation are both based on religious beliefs, why should one be taught in public schools and not the other?
- Should there be a distinction between experimental (operational) science and historical science?
- Since a naturalistic approach to science can only refer to materialistic explanations, how can naturalists use logic if logic is not a material part of the universe?
- Is it necessary for science to allow only naturalism?
- Would all scientific thought and advancement end if supernatural creation was accepted as a possible model for how the universe and life on earth began?
- Why is supernatural creation considered to be a “science stopper” and not a “science starter,” considering that most of the founding fathers of science believed in the Bible and a supernatural creation event?
- If an all-knowing Creator God exists, wouldn’t it be logical to say that He knows about the scientific laws He created? Why not use what He says as a foundation for scientific thinking?
Has Satan Hijacked Science?
Reprinted from Meridian Magazine (16 Nov 2005).
©2005 by John P. Pratt. All rights Reserved.
Has Satan perverted the wonderful tool of science for his own purposes?
Is Satan interested in science, or does he work full time enticing people to sin, attacking religion, and deceptively enslaving the unsuspecting? One reason I chose the field of science was to avoid anything that Satan might be interested in, and to build my house on the rock of irrefutable scientific evidence which was guaranteed to be true. Was that naive?
To what degree is Satan into science? Does he avoid it altogether because it is indeed built on truth, which he abhors? Or perhaps he is a dabbler, focusing on just one field, such as the origin of life? Or has he infiltrated the entire infrastructure of science, from foundation to pinnacle?
This article lays no claim to having cracked Satan’s security system to expose any of his secret plans, past or future. Rather, it is an attempt to look at the obvious. The scriptures make it very clear just what the goals of both God and Satan are.Given those insights, what can we deduce about how Satan could use science to help fulfill his purposes?
1. Satan’s Goals
The scriptures make many things clear about just what is really going on in life, and one needs to understand those basics in order to make sense of this unusual world. In a nutshell, a) there really is a God who created the heavens, the earth, and all life therein, b) mankind is the offspring of God, created in his image, c) we are here to be tested to see if we will love and obey our Heavenly Father, d) there really is a being named Satan,who commands myriads of evil spirits to tempt us to fail that test, e) everyone fails the test to some degree and needs to accept Jesus Christ, the son of God, as a Savior, in order to have sins blotted out and become pure enough to return to God, and f) we will be judged after death and rewarded according to how well we did. Satan’s incentive includes the fact that his power grows as he entices others to do his bidding.
Now let’s suppose that you were Satan. What would you do to get people to sin, that is, to disobey the commandments of God? Okay, sure, you would do the obvious of emphasizing immediate gratification of desires by using shortcut or cheating methods, rather than following God’s slow but steady straight and narrow path to happiness. But what about science? Is there any way that you could use science to help meet that goal of enticing people to sin? Let’s explore that possibility.
2. Satan’s Perverted Science
For many reasons, it not only appears that Satan is interested in science, he may well be attempting to hijack all of science and attempt to force it to become the foundation of his new official state atheistic religion. Let’s see why, by considering just what a powerful tool a perverted science could be for him to meet his goals. Let’s look at some true fundamental scientific principles, and then see how Satan could pervert them into false traditions.
2.1 True Science Begins With Observation
What is science? Consider the follow very brief summary:
True Principle: Science is the systematic study of the observable.
In other words, all phenomena of nature which can be directly detected by the human senses can be included in the realm of science. When once sense fails, sometimes others can compensate. For example, air is invisible, but it can be felt and heard as wind. Moreover, there are many features of nature beyond human abilities to observe for which instruments can be invented to detect and measure. These would include the invisible forms of light, such as infrared, ultraviolet, radio waves, microwaves, x-rays, etc. Atoms are too small to see, but can be photographed with x-ray technology. Science also includes the realm of inventing models to explain observations, even though elements of those models cannot be observed, but only their effects. For example, atoms were proposed to exist by the ancient Greeks, but were not actually observed until the last century. Even smaller particles called quarks were postulated to exist in the last century but are not yet directly observable. Still they are part of science because their proposed existence helps explain what is observed. (well we have to take the word of the scientists for that. Most of us will never observe their effect)
Note also that science began with only what the human senses could detect. After many experiments were performed just using the human senses, instruments were invented to make more precise, accurate, unbiased, and repeatable observations. Just because a machine had not yet been invented to improve on the human senses did not invalidate the human observations.For example, people could look up and see the sun, moon and stars. When the telescope was invented to improve our abilities, it was a wonderful accomplishment indeed, (that is debatable. Telescopes, and all machines are created by scientists who have proven themselves to be untrustworthy. We don’t really know what distortions are built into the telescopes or how they affect our minds.) but telescopes do not totally replace human observations. Scientific studies are still done watching meteor showers, which are often best accomplished with the unaided eye.
There are many areas where humans have senses for which machines are not readily available to duplicate. We have what is called the “mind’s eye” where we can imagine things and dream. Some of our greatest inventors, such as Nikola Tesla, created their inventions totally in their mind before committing them to physical models. The fact that we do not yet have a camera to take snapshots of our imaginary creations does not mean that they do not exist. There are people who claim to see the human aura, see future occurrences, do remote viewing of current events at distant locations, go into the spirit world, visit the past, and move physical objects with their minds. All of these phenomena can be measured and studied and hence are part of science. If any of those claims were false, then science could do experiments to prove just that. But the fact that we have not yet invented a machine to measure some of them does not disqualify them in any way from being scientific.
Thus, true science includes a lot of turf. On the other hand, there are still many areas beyond science.There could be huge regions of our universe which we could not detect by our senses nor by instruments. There could be other dimensions, other worlds, and even other whole universes. Even observable things could be too big or too small to study. The mere fact that man is ignorant of them does not mean that they do not exist.
We have names for other disciplines beyond science. One important such field is that of religion. Many people claim to have talked with beings from other realms, called angels, who have been sent here specifically to tell us things that we could never discover using scientific methods because they are beyond the realm of the observable. In fact, some men, such as Moses, have even claimed to have talked personally with the Creator of the heavens and the earth, who told them details of just how everything was created, which we could never have known otherwise. (EVERY CHILD of God should be talking with HIM everyday. That is one of the great gifts we received because Jesus paid the price. Fellowship with GOD was restored. Under the blood of Jesus we have access to the throne. We can speak to GOD and He will answer. He also sent the Holy Spirit to LEAD US TO ALL TRUTH.)
Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and show thee great and mighty things, which thou knowest not. Jeremiah 33:3
“If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.” James 1:5
And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. John 14:16-17
These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. John 14:25-26
“Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.” John 16:13
For example, Moses was told that man was created in the image of God. That is something totally beyond the capability of science to discover. The existence of heaven and hell are beyond the reach of present science, as is the existence of Satan. It would be foolhardy indeed to be so myopic as to believe that nothing exists beyond what we can detect with our senses and instruments.
In summary, science is the study of everything that can be observed, but true science makes no claim that it is the study of everything that exists.
2.2 False Science: Materialism
Many modern scientists have made one seemingly little addition to the above definition of true science. At first it might seem logical and innocent enough, but closer inspection shows that it totally fulfills many of Satan’s goals so well, as to be the “smoking gun” which points to his involvement. That little principle can be summarized in one word: “materialism.”
Materialism is a doctrine that has been introduced into science, declaring (without a shred of evidence) that nothing else exists beyond that which can be observed, either by humans or instruments. If that were true, then it would follow that science is the study of everything that exists.
False Principle: Nothing exists which cannot be observed.
Note that this is a patently absurd and unscientific statement! It is amazing that so many modern scientists have accepted some form of materialism without question. Why? Why would so many accept materialism as a true doctrine, when it flies in the face of true science? Real scientists seek to know how the universe actually is, rather than to declare beforehand that only certain kinds of events are allowed to exist, namely those in the tiny realm of what man can observe.
How foolish it is to assume that something doesn’t exist because we cannot see it or measure it. Do you remember as a child being surprised to learn about the existence of air? What would you think of someone who didn’t believe in air simply because it is invisible? Okay, so you can feel air when it moves, but what if you were the only one who could feel it, and everyone else thought you were crazy because they could not. … Would the inability of others to do likewise, or the fact that no instrument had yet been invented to measure what you sense, prove that your experience was all an illusion?
It should be obvious to all that it is absurd to think that something does not exist just because it cannot be detected by most people or by a machine.
In seeking an answer as to why otherwise intelligent scientists would agree to such a limiting principle, let us now consider the possibility that Satan is indeed involved. If Satan were promoting his own special form of science, would he not choose materialism as the foundation? Think of the huge rewards he would get just for adopting this one principle.
First, in one sweep of his hand, Satan can dispose of God, Satan himself, heaven, hell, the spirit world, all spiritual phenomena, including the human spirit, evil spirits, and also of all knowledge of the future. Having thus decreed God out of existence, the next crucial steps follow immediately: If there is no God, then there are no God-given commandments. If there are no commandments, there is no sin. If there is no sin, then there is no need for a Savior to atone for sin, no need to accept Jesus Christ. Also, there would be no afterlife in which we will be judged as to how well we followed God’s laws and the example of our Redeemer. If that were the case, man might as well follow the so-called “law of the jungle,” the “survival of the fittest.”
One proponent of this doctrine of materialism over two thousand years ago, who later admitted to having been taught directly by the devil, declared “you cannot know of things which you do not see” and “man fares in this life according to the management of the creature; therefore every man prospers according to his genius, and every man conquers according to his strength; and whatsoever a man does is no sin.”
Thus, atheism is not new, and it does not need to be the official religion of scientists. Very few scientists before the Twentieth Century were atheists, and the top scientists have been, and continue to be, predominantly Christian. In fact, materialism, and its child atheism, have no place in true science at all.
2.3 Natural Law and the Scientific Method
Science has been successful because it is based on the observation that there seem to be “laws” in nature which energy and matter always obey.
Scientific Principle: Matter and energy are observed to follow strict laws.
Whether these laws are self-existent or whether they are laws which God wrote is a question beyond the realm of science. The important thing is that we can discover how the universe works by doing experiments to deduce just what these laws are.
The rock on which science is founded is called the “Scientific Method”:
True science employs the “Scientific Method” of 1) observing, 2) proposing a theory to explain the observation, and then 3) predicting future observations using that theory.
(But, I must add here that this is a counsel of perfection and does not always happen. Scientists, being only human, hate discarding old, comfortable and familiar theories. source: Freemasonry and the Birth of Modern Science) also, as noted above there is a fourth step in their method; that of CONTROL
If the future predictions fail, then the theory is either scrapped or modified until it is able to predict the outcome of an experiment accurately. ,,, To me it is a way to discover the laws that God had given all matter to obey, without the experimenter needing to be a prophet or even spiritual in any way. But if someone prefers to believe the laws are somehow self existent, that works just as well for the experiments.
2.4 Satan Avoids True Science
So what has all of this to do with Satan? The Scientific Method, used correctly, leads to the discovery of true principles. Satan is opposed to truth in all forms, and to true education and enlightenment. His goal is to keep people in ignorance, poverty, and slavery to his bidding. Knowing the truth can make people free, including free from much of Satan’s bondage. Therefore, Satan avoids the scientific method whenever possible.
How can Satan get away with avoiding the Scientific Method, while purporting to do science? He does it by focusing on the past and on the futurewhich are both areas beyond direct observation of the present, the realm of science.
Satan can fabricate all sorts of complete nonsense about the origins of the universe, the solar system, the earth and all of the creatures that live on it. None of these theories can be tested,but that does not stop him from proclaiming them as absolute truth. There are some cases where theories can be tested, such as doing experiments on fruit flies to test theories that random mutations can increase genetic information content in a species. When all of these experiments fail, rather than discarding the false theory, in accordance with the scientific method, the results are simply ignored and the theory is assumed true in spite of the negative evidence.Satan’s theories of the origin of the earth and life are almost entirely based on unfounded speculation, that often contradict all of the actual evidence.
Another “smoking gun” which strongly points to Satan’s involvement becomes obvious when materialists use force to teach speculation as truth.That is, they pass laws which require teaching that science is based on atheism, and that the existence of everything can be explained without God. The big clue is that laws are passed actually forbidding the teaching in government supported schools that most of the actual scientific evidence points to the creation of the universe and all life therein as designed by a Creator. They immediately divert attention from the truth by screaming that this scientific discovery is somehow “religion in disguise,” and hence inappropriate in school. But it is not religion at all. The existence of the Creator can be scientifically deduced in much the same way that invisible atoms were discovered. The fact that God chose to reveal himself to mankind right from the beginning (which is indeed religion) does not invalidate later scientific work which also strongly points to his existence. The point here is that the big clue that Satan is involved is that laws are actually passed prohibiting teaching of true science and only allowing the teaching of speculation, which just happens to fulfill Satan’s agenda. And of course all the arguments about separation of church and state evaporate when one realizes that atheism is a religion and hence has become a state enforced religion.
The reader may think that I’m speaking only about theories of the origin of plants, animals, and mankind. While that is the most obvious place where Satan’s speculations have been very convincing, the problem is much more far reaching than that. Once the postulate of materialism is accepted as a requisite for acceptable science, then Satan is free to speculate about the entire past and future of everything in the observable universe.
2.5 Example from Astronomy
Consider the teachings of modern astronomy about just what stars are, where they came from and where they are going. That was the focus of my Ph.D. dissertation, so I’m more qualified to write on that subject than most others. Much of current belief about what stars are is well-founded on the scientific method. One can measure brightnesses, colors, and even the masses of stars and discover some important relationships between them. For example, the majority of stars follow the rule that if one arranges the stars in order of increasing mass, then the sequence (called the “Main Sequence”) also increases in surface temperature and the color gradually shifts from red to blue and then ultra-violet. This is one of the most important “facts” (that is, “observations”) of modern astronomy.
The problems begin to arise when scientists attempt to explain exactly how these stars got placed in this sequence, and exactly how things might change in the future. The problem is not that scientists try to explain the past and the future. After all, the objective of the scientific method is to be able to predict the outcome of future experiments. The problem occurs when a) science cannot perform the experiment to predict the future and b) it then declares with absolute certainty just what the past and future are, even those it has no solid basis of experiments to do so.
In this example from astronomy, we are told that stars formed themselves from gaseous clouds in the plane of the galaxy. We are told that the massive, hot bright blue beacons in the sky such as many of the stars in the constellation Orion, are the very youngest stars, and that they are rapidly burning themselves out, being some of the least permanent members of the galaxy. As for the future, we are told that the sun and most stars will someday exhaust their fuel and become cold, dark burned-out dwarf stars.
While this is the mainstream theory, taught as nearly absolute truth in beginning astronomy classes, there are other explanations of the same observed facts. One is that most stars are still gravitationally accumulating more and more matter from those gas and dust clouds in which they are now seen, and they are increasing in mass and getting hotter and bluer as they do so. If so, then the big, hot blue stars are some of the oldest patriarchs of the galaxy, rather than being “flash in-the-pan” youth.
What difference does it make? And would Satan care which is the predominant explanation? Here’s why I think that he does care. Hopefully we have all seen a night sky filled with thousands of awe-inspiring stars. It can truly be a dazzling spectacle which can fill one with reverence for a great Creator. To me, the brightest stars are the bright, old governing stars of our galaxy which have accumulated greatness through the ages. When I look at the dazzling constellation of Orion, I see some great stars for which I feel awe and even reverence. Someday they may “die” in a great supernova explosion, and as one star passes away, so shall another accumulate its recycled remnants. Thus, there is no end to the works of God, neither to his words.
To me, the more popular explanation is not inspiring at all, but rather depressing. The big bright stars are supposed to explode quickly before they have any lasting importance, and the rest of the whole universe just cools down to be a meaningless graveyard of burned-out star corpses. Without God, the universe would be a meaningless stage on which we act out meaningless lives, which ultimately end in futility.
<h2 align=”center“>3. Have We Been Deceived?</h2>
It appears that some of the huge recent successes of Satan to entice people to sin can be attributed directly to this false doctrine of materialism and atheism. Sin is so rampant today that the Lord has made it clear that the wicked will have to be entirely destroyed from the earth in preparation for his glorious Millennial reign when truth and righteousness will finally prevail. But what has led to such gross wickedness? In many cases we now casually accept horrible crimes against humanity as standard practice, which is no longer shocking because it has become legal and commonplace. Let us now consider some sins which now appear more acceptable because we have been taught that we are mere animals in a godless world.
As we approach the Christmas season, we review the story of the birth of our Savior. When we get to the part about the horrible King Herod who had all of the infant boys of Bethlehem slain by the sword, we are shocked at this heinous crime which this monstrous man committed. There were probably about 100-200 infants slain. What could be worse than that?
Consider just how monstrous we have become. Some 40,000,000 unborn infants have been slain in what is arguably the most Christian country in the worldsince abortion was legalized in the United States. Many of those deaths come from horrible means of submitting the unborn to caustic solutions or ripping off arms and legs while the baby is still alive. People scream foul when we subject prisoners of war to embarrassment. What if we tore off limbs of terrorists? And yet we casually talk to a neighbor as she considers exercising her right to choose a horrible death for her baby. How is it possible that we have been so lulled to sleep that we don’t tell her she will probably suffer the regrets of hell for such a foul deed? Have we anesthetized our consciences with false “scientific” reasoning?
Of course, abortion is only one of many problems which has probably been exacerbated by false science. Murders have become so common that most are no longer newsworthy. Many people do not consider adultery to be a sin and divorce is now merely another question of freedom of choice.Similarly, the sin of fornication is now accepted as normal sexual maturing. “Living together” is seen by many as a logical preparation for marriage,perhaps even temple marriage. Do our youth know that adultery, incest, homosexuality, and bestiality were all punishable by death when the Ten Commandments were given? (Lev. 20:10-16). We watch outright theft by hurricane victims looting unprotected stores, and hear them justify it as “survival of the fittest”and then hear the news commentator ask her viewers, “Wouldn’t you do the same thing?” Do we nod in agreement or are we shocked at the suggestion? The prohibitions of the Ten Commandments against murder, stealing and adultery are not only now out of sight (thanks to our tacit acceptance of judicial rulings), but also apparently out of mind.
How is it that we have come to view these crimes as acceptable behavior? To me the answer is that materialism is one of the root causes of the problem.We have been told that it is not really a baby, but a mass of cells called a fetus that has no feeling and is not alive. All scientific evidence contradicts such an absurd claim, and yet we allow ourselves to accept it. We justify theft and murder with “law of the jungle” arguments, based on believing that there is no God who will judge us after this life on how well we obeyed his commandments. If Satan can dupe us into believing that his false science has proven there is no God,then he has made a huge victory toward justifying sin.
Science employs wonderful systematic methods of discovering the laws of what can be observed in nature. The seemingly innocuous extension proposed by some scientists that nothing else exists beyond what can be observed at first might appear logical and even a useful scientific principle. Closer examination, however, shows that such a doctrine of materialism serves all of the purposes of Satan so perfectly that it would not be surprising if he turned out to be the inspiration behind it. It has led to atheism by removing God from the universe, along with his commandments, the entire spirit world and any after life, including future judgment of our actions. Many of us have been led to replace God’s law with the “law of the jungle,”which condones horrible crimes as merely “survival of the fittest.” It might now be a good time to re-evaluate just how many of our beliefs and actions might be based, even subconsciously, on erroneous teachings which have been nothing more than Satanic speculations masquerading as science.
- Pratt, John P., “What is Creation?,” Meridian Magazine (6 Mar 2002).
- These are the words of Korihor, one of the anti-Christs described in the Book of Mormon (see Alma 30:15, 17, 53).
- Pratt, John P., “Scientists and Belief in God,” Meridian Magazine (25 Oct 2000).
- Pratt, John P., “Did God Write the Laws of Physics?,” Meridian Magazine (16 Apr 1999).
- For more on the scientific method, see Pratt, John P., “Strengths and Weaknesses of Science,” Meridian Magazine (28 Dec 2000) and “Millennial Science,” Charting a New Millennium, ed. Proctor, Maurine & Scot, (Salt Lake City: Aspen Books, 1998), pp. 367-85.
The topic that has become known as Flat Earth has caused a great deal of stir and has really forced people to take a more serious look at what they believe and why they believe it. The main stream media designated it FLAT EARTH. Why? Because that terminology harkens back to our early years of education when it was pounded into our young minds that earlier society was so backward and foolish they believed in a “FLAT EARTH” with edges that one would fall off if they go too close. The media was very active and very strategically poking fun at the topic and mentioning with a mocking tone. “WE DON’T HAVE TIME FOR A MEETING OF THE FLAT EARTH SOCIETY” came from the mouth of then president OBUMA. That was the first I ever heard of it. The mere fact that he so pointed made mention of it that made me want to look into it. Of course I did, and my life has never been the same.